2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant has the history of having been punished for the same crime, and the Defendant did not recover the damage to the overdue wage even though the unpaid amount was totaled 6,109,000 won, and there was no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court in the trial.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, health condition, and economic situation, as shown in the hearing of the court below and the party, the sentence imposed by the court below is not hot within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.